Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base vs Command A
Benchmark Performance
Available Benchmarks
Technical Differences
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base | Command A |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Qwen | Cohere |
| Family | Qwen3 Coder Next Base | Command A |
| Model | Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base | Command A |
| Version | Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base | Command A |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | Unknown | Unknown |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | 2024-06-01 |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 262,144 | 256,000 |
| Total parameters | 79,674,391,296 | 111,000,000,000 |
| Active parameters | 3,000,000,000 | Unknown |
| License | apache-2.0 | Unknown |
| Open weights | Yes | No |
| API available | Unknown | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | No |
| Provider access | Unknown | Cohere (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, tools | agents, chat, citations, multilingual, rag, structured_outputs, tools |
12 comparable fields · 9 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate
Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base Capabilities
Command A Capabilities
Internal Comparison Graph
Related Comparisons
| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Qwen3-Coder-NextQwen | vs | family variantstext | |
Command ACohere | vs | Command A VisionCohere | family variantstext |
| vs | Qwen3.5-35B-A3BQwen | family variantstext | |
| vs | family variantstext | ||
| vs | Command ACohere | family variantstext | |
 ERNIE 5.1Baidu | vs | Command ACohere | cross-developer peerstext |
ERNIE X1.1Baidu | vs | Command ACohere | cross-developer peerstext |
| vs | Qwen3.7-PlusQwen | family variantstext | |
Command ACohere | vs |  Antigravity AgentGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
| vs | cross-developer peerstext | ||
| vs |  Devstral-2-123B-Instruct-2512Mistral AI | cross-developer peerstext | |
| vs | cross-developer peerstext |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base vs Command A FAQs
Is Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base or Command A better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base and Command A, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base or Command A?+
Only Command A has a directly sourced input price: $2.50 per million tokens. Only Command A has a directly sourced output price: $10.00 per million tokens.
Which has a larger context window, Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base or Command A?+
Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base has the larger sourced context window. Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base supports 262,144 and Command A supports 256,000.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base or Command A?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base or Command A be self-hosted?+
Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base is open weight; Command A is not marked open weight.
Can Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base and Command A understand images?+
Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base is not documented with image input; Command A is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base or Command A?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base is — and Command A is 8,000.
Do Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base and Command A support reasoning and tool use?+
Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base: tool calling. Command A: tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base or Command A?+
Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base has 0 sourced provider routes; Command A has 1, so Command A has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Qwen3-Coder-Next-Base or Command A?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.